Hypo-Ortho

Thomas wrote in the help needed thread in Orthodox-Catholic Discussion:

Quote

ROCOR uses the Slavic Rite as it existed in Imperial Russia which is slightly different from the Slavic Rite used by the current Russian Orthodox Church

Other than a few petitions in the litanies, how are they different?

Since this subject has been brought up, my ROCOR tonsured-reader godson has told me that there are differences between the ROCOR and OCA recensions of the Liturgy of the Presanctified Gifts. Does anyone have any idea of what these differences might be? Is it more than a variation of a few petitions in the litanies, for example?

Since this subject has been brought up, my ROCOR tonsured-reader godson has told me that there are differences between the ROCOR and OCA recensions of the Liturgy of the Presanctified Gifts.

Thanks, Hypo-Ortho. I assumed that OCA practice would be different - abridged, at least - from ROCOR's. And even though some consider the OCA still part of the MP, I assumed that it differs from MP practice the same way.

Hypo-Ortho

Serge<<And even though some consider the OCA still part of the MP, I assumed that it differs from MP practice the same way. >>

Whoever these "some" are, they'd better get over it, don't you think, Serge? The OCA, and especially since it was formally granted a Tomos of Autocephaly by the MP in 1970, does *not* consider itself to be part of the MP, and neither does the MP consider the OCA to be part of the MP. Both the MP and the OCA recognize the OCA as a completely separate and independent eccesial entity, indeed, as a canonical Autocephalous Orthodox Church. The clock won't turn backwards on the OCA's autocephaly, despite the sometimes shrill voices of its detractors.

Getting back to the differences in recensions in the Liturgy of the Presanctified between the ROCOR and the OCA, I've been given the impression that even the order of some of the prayers, if not some of the prayers themselves, may be different. Any liturgical experts "in the know" about this? The only way, I'm told, that I can find out is to actually attend a Presanctified Liturgy in a ROCOR church (not likely with my choir commitments at my OCA church this year), but surely there must be someone who has access both to the ROCOR and the OCA's texts and rubrics for this Lenten service and can tell us the differences here.

While I was in ROCOR, His Grace Bishop Constantine (of blessed memory) was emphatic in my training classes that ROCOR presented in its Liturgy, "True Imperial Russia" and thus in his opinion "Holy Russia" recension or as he called it Rite. As I neither read Church Slavonic nor Russian, He would use the Hapgood books with various older typikas in English and would compare these with the MP and OCA noting what he saw as their changes. He focussed on some practices that he felt the Bolsheviks had put into place in the church that had not found their way "Thanks be to God" into ROCOR and its practices.

My own studies generally found that very little was changed with the exception of the extra litanies for the "Persecuted Rusian People" and the later changes to the "Suffering Russian People. There was of course no prayers for the Russian Patriarch although they continued the prayer for the "Right-believing patriarchs...." and of course specific prayers for unity and ROCOR that were missing from initial Imprerial texts appear only in ROCOR texts. To someone who has only attended ROCOr services these are not really that apparrent however to an outsider these changes are very apparrent, at times make for a more extended service time, and are confusing if one is not used to the ROCOR way of serving the service.

The real differences the way services are served are seen when one attends the Byzantine (Greek) recension (rite) versus the Slavic recension (rite) because of the lack of the reciting of the Beatitudes and the variation in the serving of the antiphons of the Divine Liturgy.It is not until the departure of the catechumens do the two recesions reunite into a Liturgy that feels familiar to both recensions.

So how, then, does OCA usage compare to MP/ROCOR usage? And is it only in terms of the "Liturgy of the Catechumens" that Byzantine and Slavic usages differ, or are there other differences? What are these differences? Anyone have anything I could read on the matter online or in print?

Logged

"Do not tempt the Mor thy Mod."

Mor no longer posts on OCNet. He follows threads, posts his responses daily, occasionally starts threads, and responds to private messages when and as he wants. But he really isn't around anymore.

Based on my church-visiting experience it's shorter and more likely to be in English. Other than that it obviously is part of the Russian liturgical 'family' with highback chasubles, Psalms 102 and 145 excerpts at Liturgy instead of the first and second antiphons (except on great feasts) and Russian music. I'm sure there are more differences in the details but that's all I know.

Quote

And is it only in terms of the "Liturgy of the Catechumens" that Byzantine and Slavic usages differ, or are there other differences? What are these differences? Anyone have anything I could read on the matter online or in print?

Minor point: I think you meant 'Litany of the Catechumens'.

Well, there's the Russian usage and then there is the Greek usage, also used by Antiochian Greek Orthodox, Melkite Catholics, Ukrainian and Ruthenian Catholics, and I'm guessing by Serbian and Bulgarian Orthodox too, which still uses the first and second antiphons at every Liturgy. The Russians replaced them with excerpts from Psalms 102 and 145, except on great feasts where the older antiphons are retained. AFAIK only Russian Orthodox usually wear highback chasubles.

I'm sure an expert among us will point out the inaccuracies in my description and the differences between the different national Orthodox recensions (like 'uses' in the Roman Rite) of the Byzantine Rite.

Nah, I meant "Liturgy", as in the first half of the Divine Liturgy...what Catholics would call the Liturgy of the Word. I assumed from the other post that saying such would be accurate since Thomas said It is not until the departure of the catechumens do the two recesions reunite into a Liturgy that feels familiar to both recensions.

Logged

"Do not tempt the Mor thy Mod."

Mor no longer posts on OCNet. He follows threads, posts his responses daily, occasionally starts threads, and responds to private messages when and as he wants. But he really isn't around anymore.

This is an interesting thread. I wish someone could point out the alleged differences though. I have looked through Hapgood, which was completed before the Revolution and as such should mirror ROCOR usage, and do not find differences. Perhaps a closer study placing the texts side-by-side would reveal somethinh, I might try that.

Of course ROCOR has the right to establish its usage as pre-Revolutionary. I do wonder however why that is the only "correct" or "legitimate" Russian usages. It took hundreds (actually about 1,000) years to get to that point and during that time things changed why could they not continue to change?

Tony

Logged

Tómame como al tequila, de un golpe y sin pensarlo. - Ricardo Arjona

I'd be a fool to surrender when I know I can be a contender and if everbody's a sinner then everybody can be a winner ...I'll see you when yo